So the XR8 should have performed better because it was properly run in now, and optimized performance of an engine doesnt come until after around 10,000km..... or the SS was a lot newer, and the XR8 is slower because it is a more tired engine?
If your a Ford lover you will take the latter excuse, if you love Holdens, you would definately use the former.

So who won overall, cos us Kiwis dont get it at least 2 weeks after you guys

Is it the same old stuff- SS is the more hard core drivers car, while the XR8 is more relaxed but is easier to drive fast etc. etc. cos thats whats happened with every SS v XR8 and Clubby V GT I've read

Personal preferrence is always gonna be the major factor here. Put it this way, if you buy an SS people arent gonna think you're driving a crap car, and if you're driving an XR8 likewise, unless the person who is judging is mega-biased..

im a subscriber of Motor and im becoming concerned about the number of HSV's and holdens that motor write up about. The last 3 issues in a row feature a HSV car on the front cover. Also, as per the XR8 vs SS times, The XR8 is always gonna be slower guys, It weighs in at 150kg heavier than the SS. Also carries alot more front end weight too.

"Fire up the 260kW 5.4 Boss engine and you won't care. You're in the presence of greatness It is one of the best engine notes in the world. That's right, the world!"

Quote:

""The Falcon is a class above the Commodore. It gives the driver the choice of understeer5, neutral balance or oversteer. And the ride quality is so much better that it's almost laughable"

The Commodore is described in conclusion as

Quote:

"fast but flawed"

To be honest nobody can argue that in stock trim the Commodore has the XR8's measure in terms of straight-line speed, but that's where it all ends. Spend as little as $500 or less on an induction kit for the big Ford and you'll most likely have the Commodore’s measure, but now benefit for all the things the BA XR8's simply do much better.